Hi<div><br></div><div>I understand your skepticism about accepting match into CCL, but we can consider cond as</div><div>a general and portable stuff. Many languages have a pattern matching built into the language.</div><div>
I believe it is very useful and it is deplorable (for me at least) that there is no pattern matching </div><div>built into CCL that is very efficient</div><div><br></div><div>I think the match I wrote is concise and it looks beautiful (I do not know about the implementation), </div>
<div>it remains to see if it is as I see it, that is why I wanted to contribute the code and see how it can be </div><div>viewed by experts; if I was a CCL expert I would hack it and add match to the language, but </div><div>
unfortunately I am not.</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards</div><div>Taoufik</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:47 PM, Greg Pfeil <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:greg@clozure.com" target="_blank">greg@clozure.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On 3 Oct 2012, at 13:25, Taoufik Dachraoui <<a href="mailto:dachraoui.taoufik@gmail.com">dachraoui.taoufik@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>

<br>
> My intention was just to contribute with the code to CCL so that it could be improved<br>
> by CCL experts and finally be part of CCL; I use CCL for all my developments<br>
> and lately I am using a lot the match I wrote, but I know that it can be greatly<br>
> improved (eg. performance, more beautiful code, more robust, ...)<br>
<br>
</div>It is extremely unlikely that any general and portable stuff like this would be accepted into CCL. It's much better to try to get it into Quicklisp, which makes it easily available to any Common Lisp user, regardless of whether they use CCL, SBCL, or something else.</blockquote>
</div><br></div>